We carried out a review of the data available to us about Coast Community Care on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Coast Community Care, you can give feedback on this service.
The registered manager was given 48 hours' notice of the inspection as we needed to be sure that the office was open and staff would be available to speak with us.
This service is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats. It provides a service to older adults. Not everyone using Coast Home Care receives a regulated activity; CQC only inspects the service being received by people provided with ‘personal care’; help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do, we also take into account any wider social care provided.
At the time of our inspection, 14 people were supported with their personal care needs by the service.
Coast Home Care was registered in March 2017. This was their first New Approach Inspection and rating.
There was a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
People and their relatives placed great value on the friendships that they developed with staff. They felt that staff went beyond all expectations in the care and support that staff provided. Staff would often visit people on their day off to say hello and to spend social time with them.
People were positive about the care provided by the service and said that they felt safe receiving care in their homes. One person said, “Amazing staff, make sure I’m safe and check my life line button before they leave.” Staff recognised the signs of potential abuse and knew the reporting system to keep people safe. People were placed at the centre of their care and their risks were assessed and reviewed regularly to ensure care remained appropriate to meet their needs. There were sufficient numbers of trained staff who had the appropriate recruitment checks to ensure they were suitable for their role. Staff arrived on time for their visits and the right numbers of staff were available to provide the support people needed. People received their medicines as prescribed by staff who had been assessed as competent to give people’s medicines safely.
People and their relatives were involved in all decisions about how they wanted their care and support needs met. People spoke positively about the relationships they had with staff. Staff ensured people consented to the care they received and were aware of how to respect people's choices and rights. People were supported to have sufficient to eat and drink and were encouraged to have a balanced diet. People were supported to access healthcare services when required. People told us staff had the skills and knowledge required to support them. Staff had received training relevant to their role.
People said staff went above and beyond what was expected from them. People and their relatives told us staff and the management team as being extremely kind, caring and friendly. People were placed at the centre of their care and people told us they felt listened to by the staff who supported them. People told us staff always respected their privacy and dignity when providing care and where supported to develop their independence. One person said, “They are very polite and respectful, always encouraging when I need it.”
People were encouraged to give their feedback and views about the quality of the service they received. Communication systems used to share information about people's care and support needs ensured that staff were responsive to any changes. There were systems in place to record and investigate concerns with details of the investigation and outcomes. This meant people were assured concerns and issues were dealt with appropriately. People were encouraged to give their feedback and views about the quality of the service they received. Staff knew people well and people received care in a way they wished to receive care. Care records were personalised, regularly reviewed and updated to ensure they were reflective of people's current needs.
People said the service was well run. Comments included, “Very well run, no complaints at all,” and “Very organised and punctual.” The leadership within the service was strong and an open and a positive culture was promoted. People were supported by caring committed staff. Staff said they felt valued and were listened to by the management team. Staff were confident in their roles and were aware of their responsibilities and said they had access to support and training they needed. Effective quality audit checks were completed regularly to monitor the quality of the service provided. People were happy to recommend the service to family and friends based on their own experiences.